Stats

A good ol' stretch of the muscles. Been out of the loop for over a year. Definately rough ridin' attempting this stuff again.

I was going to embark on a much more elaborate presentation but I think I'll save that idea for awhile. Just going to quietly put this up and pretend I wasn't here. Na. I've got a project I'm spending some time on so I'll probably be around. As above... I just needed to stretch my muscles.

It's cool how even after so long out of the game you can still hop back in snap and your gears into motion. My only technical commentary was that some kind of distortion on the star blur might be interesting to play with. Perhaps to mimic some kind of camera lens? Just an idea.

n1 man. much depth here if you look back at the planets in the background and notice the difference in lighting. my only complaint, and it's one of opinion, is i'd like to see the largest planet get moved up and to the right, so i can make out what's going on behind it better

I'm faced with indecision. Where am I to look? At the momentum lines, the lighting of that planets that practicaly covers all 360 degrees or this huge black circle in the middle? Honestly, that main planet isn't working for me due to 1. its lighting and 2. its placement. I think you have shot yourself in the foot a bit because it takes up SO much of the canvas. After reading your comments to DocDan, I think I understand what you were trying to pull off - weere you trying to place the viewer in the shadow of the planet? Either way I didn't get the feel of that planet being close up at all.

This idea of momentum...again I think it is tearing up the dynamic of the work a tad. I say this because considering that the planets are all lit from different directions around this central lightsource, placing these lines in just one direction seems confusing. Perhaps it would've been more effective if radial blurred form the centre, but perhaps this would end up a bit too generic. Still, I think there is better direction you could take with this idea of momentum.

What I do like about the work is behind this main planet...the planets to the lower right are particularly well done, notably the one practically bathed in light.

I think you can do better. Hell I know you can, but you said this is a stretch of the muscles and it's cool to see that you havent lost your conceptual eye.

N.B. kinda reminds me of that 'inside a nebulae' preview you had on the scrap you released called 'Undone.'

Points taken. I'll say right out of the box that I still feel pretty settled in the way it has been accomplished.

As for the momentum element. I've seen it else where even in your work a time or too. Its an added element. Without it a certain spark is gone from the integrity of the image.

I'm not very sure I see the issue described with the larger "planets". Its size on the canvas was meant to be as such and its lighting reflects its source as well. The true light sits in the lower right and it would lend a bit of the surface of the "planet" to be seen in the halo effect of the day side and due to the overwhelming nature of the light source itself you'd be able to identify a bit of the surrounding surface all around as well. Perhaps a lens flare or refraction on the light source would have added in that visual acceptance that seems to be missing but it created an overpowering issue with the work I felt I did not intend or need, So I did without them.

The light isn't nessesarily going to just have an ecliptic presentation and shadow out everything if it sits to the lower right. There will in fact be some lighting on that side of the "planet" and the smaller sphere will have a bit of revealing ambient light surrounding it as well. The flat panel monitor I created the work on bares out quite a bit of detail in both planets as I intended for them to have some ambient aid on all sides as this light source is obviously overpowering that its presence is felt in the entire image.

Perhaps the compositional integrity of the image needed one or two more elements added or refined to accenuate the depth of the lighting but ultimately I'm confident from where I sit that its conceptually sound.

Good points. I will keep my eye on the ball with future projects and focus the eye even more on the lighting structure. In the end though, for just a "stretch" after a year of not venturing in this area I'm pretty sure I've still got it. Even if I am just an old timer amongst the youngins'

Movement=
Light and colors=
Textures of the planets and subtle texture of the background=

The only thing that bothers me is that the largest planets only seem to be lighted from one side, and the way it's lighted doesn't really match with the color and brightness of the space around them. Other than that, I like this. Nice work

Being that close to the foreground planets and almost directly behind them would "dampen" some of the light and "color" you mentioned.

The shadow of the largest would give the eye some shelter and give you a wider range of vision. You aren't going to see the muggy ambient gas which aids the lighting on the backside, being that close to it.

I still don't understand why it would seem as though light is only coming from the bottom-right of the large planets. Is there a light source not depicted? Some of the logisitics of the image still leave me confused. Note, I'm not saying it's bad. It's very beautiful!